54. Briefing Memorandum From the Chief of the Policy Guidance Staff, Office of Policy and Plans, United States Information Agency (Thurber) to the Deputy Director (Bray)1

SUBJECT

  • USIA Relations with the State Department

We discussed briefly last week the need for a new/expanded relationship with the Department of State.

The problem with State is roughly the same that exists with the White House—basically we do not have access to the intellectual process that goes into foreign policy decisions and events. If USIA is to support U.S. foreign policy, we need to know in advance what we are trying to accomplish, how we plan to get there, and the role USIA can play, including input and execution. I am thinking not only of major speeches but also foreign policy initiatives, trips, etc.

IOP/G does get guidance from State, usually from the PA’s in the various bureaus and we do attend most of the bureaus’ weekly meetings. I talk daily with Hodding Carter or one of his deputies. But most of this is along the lines of fire fighting. Our contacts are usually not plugged into the decision-making process and can only react to events.

I would suggest a schedule of meetings similar to those planned with the NSC.2 I would think this should be somewhere around the Deputy Secretary or S/P level—someone who has an overall handle on State’s thinking.

  1. Source: National Archives, RG 306, Office of the Director, Executive Secretariat, Secretariat Staff, Correspondence Files, 1973–1980, Entry P–104, Box 130, 7702790–7702799. No classification marking. Sent through Bastian. In the top right-hand corner of the memorandum Bray wrote, “JER Did you say you were going to talk to Tony Lake? Could we discuss? CB.” Next to this, Reinhardt wrote, “CB I see Lake Thurs. [May 26].”
  2. See Document 52.